IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [apps-discuss] I-D Action: draft-ietf-appsawg-rfc3462bis-02.txt

Ned Freed <ned.freed@mrochek.com> Wed, 19 October 2011 18:37 UTC

Return-Path: <ned.freed@mrochek.com>
X-Original-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B60211E808F for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 19 Oct 2011 11:37:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5-KWnyzihpXO for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 19 Oct 2011 11:37:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mauve.mrochek.com (mauve.mrochek.com [66.59.230.40]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1423311E808A for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Wed, 19 Oct 2011 11:37:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dkim-sign.mauve.mrochek.com by mauve.mrochek.com (PMDF V6.1-1 #35243) id <01O7EEVU008W011ADO@mauve.mrochek.com> for apps-discuss@ietf.org; Wed, 19 Oct 2011 11:34:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mauve.mrochek.com by mauve.mrochek.com (PMDF V6.1-1 #35243) id <01O7DDMQ0XQO00RCTX@mauve.mrochek.com>; Wed, 19 Oct 2011 11:34:50 -0700 (PDT)
Message-id: <01O7EEVR67JU00RCTX@mauve.mrochek.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 11:32:15 -0700
From: Ned Freed <ned.freed@mrochek.com>
In-reply-to: "Your message dated Wed, 19 Oct 2011 12:08:39 +0300" <CADBvc98iHh4Nk4S0ipkSs3ATKTVBM_qALM9gGApj5gaW27t4nQ@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN
References: <20111018191615.13760.71231.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <CADBvc98iHh4Nk4S0ipkSs3ATKTVBM_qALM9gGApj5gaW27t4nQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Mykyta Yevstifeyev <evnikita2@gmail.com>
Cc: "apps-discuss@ietf.org" <apps-discuss@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] I-D Action: draft-ietf-appsawg-rfc3462bis-02.txt
X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols <apps-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-discuss>
List-Post: <mailto:apps-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 18:37:24 -0000

> Murray,

> Are you going to incorporate my feedback
> (http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/current/msg69885.html)?

Speaking only for myself, I didn't find any of these suggested changes to be at
all compelling. In particular, I find the FOO [FOO] thing more troublesome than
helpful. I also don't care in the slightest about matching some sort of New
Abstract style. And finally, the applicability of the two maturity level stuff
to this effort is for the IESG to sort out.

				Ned

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email